WASHINGTON (CN) — Congressional Republicans responsible for setting the legislative agenda of the lower chamber’s energy and commerce panel did not stake out a clear position Wednesday on whether they would examine a recent federal court ruling that Democratic lawmakers have derided as an attack on reproductive rights.
Nearly two dozen House Democrats — the party’s entire delegation to the House Energy and Commerce Committee — penned a letter Wednesday to panel Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers and to Brett Guthrie, who chairs the health subcommittee, requesting a hearing on the April 7 ruling in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas that invalidated federal approval of mifepristone, a drug used in medicated abortions.
“This lawsuit is a blatant attempt to eradicate access for women to a safe medication for the termination of pregnancy and effectuate a nationwide abortion ban,” committee ranking member Frank Pallone and 23 other lawmakers wrote.
If it goes into effect, the ruling handed down by U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk would undo the Food and Drug Administration’s 2000 approval of mifepristone and pull it from store shelves. In his opinion, the Trump-appointed judge reasoned that the FDA had ignored safety concerns about the drug when giving it the green light for use.
House Democrats balked at the finding.
“Judge Kacsmaryk’s decision willingly supplants FDA’s scientific decision-making to the detriment of patients, our nation’s public health, and all Americans who rely on FDA-approved medication,” their Wednesday letter states.
The FDA, which allows pharmacies to dispense mifepristone only to patients with a doctor’s prescription, has said that just five out of every 1 million users are at risk of death when using the drug — a lower risk profile than some other prescription medications.
Democratic lawmakers sounded the alarm about what they said was an ideologically driven attempt to legally restrict access to safe abortions in the wake of the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in the case Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which rolled back judicial precedent protecting federal abortion rights.
“We have grave concerns about the ongoing attacks to reproductive health care in the United States, and the implications for those who seek abortion care following the Supreme Court’s decision … which overturned nearly 50 years of precedent protecting the Constitutional right to abortion,” the letter states.
If allowed to stand, the House Democrats contend, that Judge Kacsmaryk's ruling could have a chilling effect on public trust in federal agencies such as the FDA. The lawmakers pointed to an amicus brief in the case by a group of food and drug law scholars who said that a ruling against mifepristone’s approval could undermine established drug-approval processes and affect patients, health care providers and the pharmaceutical industry.
“Given the implications of this decision, we believe it is important for the Committee to hear from experts about how the outcome of this case attempts to undermine the drug approval process, restricts access to an FDA-approved medication, and places ideology, politics, and judicial activism above science,” the lawmakers wrote.
A spokesperson for the energy and commerce committee’s Republican leadership told Courthouse News Wednesday that the panel had received Democrats’ request, but refused to say whether a hearing on the mifepristone ruling was a possibility.
“The committee will continue our oversight responsibilities to ensure the FDA is performing its job for the safety of the American people, especially for women and babies,” the spokesperson said.
Representatives for the committee’s Democratic minority did not immediately return a request for comment on whether they were satisfied with that response.
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have said that the FDA should ignore the Northern District’s ruling. Barring appellate intervention from the Fifth Circuit, Kacsmaryk's ruling is set to take effect April 14.
Meanwhile, a separate lawsuit under consideration in the Ninth Circuit would take the opposite tack, blocking the feds from taking any action to restrict mifepristone access. If both cases turn up competing results, the issue could land before the Supreme Court.
Follow @BenjaminSWeiss
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
Additional Reads
-
EU chief tells Trump ‘get facts straight’ on Ukraine aid April 19, 2024 -
